Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
-
- Colonel
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Sep 12 2008
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
If i have a mutual-Defense-Pact and somebody declare war upon me, the contractual partner have only 2 choice: Break the treatie or join the war on my side. You cant discuss this. If he dont join, he breaks the Pact. You can discuss what is happening if he breaks it.
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22099
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
They might, or they might just not care either way. There are middle ground relationships. Others on the forum have confirmed that if an AI wants out of the treaty it will break it.playa wrote:Is that like, how my allies are thinking you mean? In that case, perhaps they should dissolve the alliance...Balthagor wrote:The question has usually been, if they don't really like you but do like the person attacking you, why should they help you let alone attack the other region...
The AI does look at all player actions. We're open to suggestions on adjusting these but we need specific examples. Savegames don't hurt either. And we can only makes changes if we leave time to test out the effect to be sure we don't make things worse.playa wrote:if they like a non-allied person before an allied person who helps them out when in trouble, then for sure something is wrong here[/b]!
And I already mentioned we've made changes for update 4 so you can't really say "change it from what it is now", you haven't seen what we've done yet...
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sep 17 2008
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
Sorry for saying, "change it" etc. I will wait and see what update 4 brings!Balthagor wrote: They might, or they might just not care either way. There are middle ground relationships. Others on the forum have confirmed that if an AI wants out of the treaty it will break it.
The AI does look at all player actions. We're open to suggestions on adjusting these but we need specific examples. Savegames don't hurt either. And we can only makes changes if we leave time to test out the effect to be sure we don't make things worse.
And I already mentioned we've made changes for update 4 so you can't really say "change it from what it is now", you haven't seen what we've done yet...
Either way, I actually understand now what you mean to a level. I got attacked by another region because I had built a large army, perhaps my allies wouldn't mind me getting attacked and weakened a bit? That would make sense, but if it's like that then well it's not worth it having allies..
Although, when I had a very very large army two of my allies broke the treaty because of it, even though I had dissolved some fabrications, reserved my army etc. Maybe that's the point, "Wow, he won't stop and keep arming up!"
-
- Colonel
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Sep 06 2008
- Contact:
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
It doesn't make sense that the AI should break an alliance because you're building up your military, unless it was afraid of a betrayal. If I was that AI country I'd do my best to get the player to love me and not hurt me.
-
- Warrant Officer
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Jul 19 2008
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
After reading the posts on this forum I conclude that you have to be very carefull and think in broad terms when making alliances. Some players play the game more aggressive than others so it would probably be best not to ally with someone if you think you are going to turn on them later. For players like me who try to play the game less aggressive, the reverse is true. the option to break treaties without the other parties consent is an important aspect of the game.
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 71
- Joined: May 21 2005
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
Guess this is still 'broken' in the new expansion huh?
Started as Syria in the new global crisis camp, made allies out of all the local friendly states including mutual defense treaties ... the tool tip for which states "Guaranteed help in time of war" or something along those lines. Israel declares war on me and of course none of those 'guarantees' are honored.
A totaly pointless agreement to sign if nobody honors them. As someone said earlier there is no middle ground ... either a treaty is honored or it is broken. In all the games Ive played with 2020 with different regions a mutual defense is never honored. Either broken coding or broken understanding of what the words "mutual defense" and "guatanteed" mean.
M
Started as Syria in the new global crisis camp, made allies out of all the local friendly states including mutual defense treaties ... the tool tip for which states "Guaranteed help in time of war" or something along those lines. Israel declares war on me and of course none of those 'guarantees' are honored.
A totaly pointless agreement to sign if nobody honors them. As someone said earlier there is no middle ground ... either a treaty is honored or it is broken. In all the games Ive played with 2020 with different regions a mutual defense is never honored. Either broken coding or broken understanding of what the words "mutual defense" and "guatanteed" mean.
M
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22099
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
It is not broken, it works as designed. I'll check the description, it may need to be adjusted.
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Jun 16 2008
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
Balthagor wrote:It is not broken, it works as designed. I'll check the description, it may need to be adjusted.
works as designed? Whats it designed for then? I've never seen my allies with this treaty come to my assistance. So whats the point of this treaty? Please explain to all of us,
thanks..
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22099
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
A quick use of the search function shows that George has already explained this;
Mutual Defense discussion.
Mutual Defense discussion.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Jun 28 2008
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
It is probably broken but as in Legends recent and far too often quotes from other threads, it is something they will look into on future titles suggesting that we may need to buy yet an other game or expansion.
Cant the devs just polish this game up a little instead of already starting to rule out things and hinting for more money .
Cant the devs just polish this game up a little instead of already starting to rule out things and hinting for more money .
- Ruges
- General
- Posts: 3408
- Joined: Aug 22 2008
- Location: Nearby, really I'll see you tonight when your sleeping
- Contact:
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
It increases CB to your ally against your attacker. However if your ally liked your attacker before the attacker war deced you, Your ally is probly not going to declare war on your attacker. Lets take a hypothetical real would situation and compare it. Lets say the US went all bonzi on delcaring war on countries. We go out and conqure Iraq (not liberate but conqure), Then Iran and North Korea. We go down to south america and start conquring those countries. Now this starts pissing europe off and Germany and France along with a few other european countries declare war on the US becouse they are being too agresive. Do you think Canada is going to assist the US?warriorsoflight wrote:works as designed? Whats it designed for then? I've never seen my allies with this treaty come to my assistance. So whats the point of this treaty? Please explain to all of us,
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22099
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
Yeah, because 5 updates in 6 months really show's we're slacking...gouldjg wrote:It is probably broken but as in Legends recent and far too often quotes from other threads, it is something they will look into on future titles suggesting that we may need to buy yet an other game or expansion.
Cant the devs just polish this game up a little instead of already starting to rule out things and hinting for more money .
and please don't quote ppl out of context, Legend's comment is the same one I've used dozens of times when people suggest features that are way outside our current feature set.
and instead of trying to derail this thread of conversation, it would be more helpful to post what areas of the game you'd like to see polished. As of version 5.5.2/6.5.2 we are approaching the end of the life cycle for this product, there won't be much more to update before we move on to another game engine. The income from this project will only support so many months of development work.
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22099
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
exactly!Ruges wrote:It increases CB to your ally against your attacker. However if your ally liked your attacker before the attacker war deced you, Your ally is probly not going to declare war on your attacker. Lets take a hypothetical real would situation and compare it. Lets say the US went all bonzi on delcaring war on countries. We go out and conqure Iraq (not liberate but conqure), Then Iran and North Korea. We go down to south america and start conquring those countries. Now this starts pissing europe off and Germany and France along with a few other european countries declare war on the US becouse they are being too agresive. Do you think Canada is going to assist the US?
-
- Captain
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Jun 28 2008
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
Yeah, because 5 updates in 6 months really show's we're slacking... = Most of which had to fix a product that should not have been released in such poor condition . Sorry but Please dont think I am going to become a fanboy just because it took you so many updates to make your game half playableBalthagor wrote:gouldjg wrote:It is probably broken but as in Legends recent and far too often quotes from other threads, it is something they will look into on future titles suggesting that we may need to buy yet an other game or expansion.
Cant the devs just polish this game up a little instead of already starting to rule out things and hinting for more money .
and please don't quote ppl out of context, Legend's comment is the same one I've used dozens of times when people suggest features that are way outside our current feature set.
and instead of trying to derail this thread of conversation, it would be more helpful to post what areas of the game you'd like to see polished. As of version 5.5.2/6.5.2 we are approaching the end of the life cycle for this product, there won't be much more to update before we move on to another game engine. The income from this project will only support so many months of development work.
and please don't quote ppl out of context, Legend's comment = Well to me it always comes that way when Legend replies almost as though he is saying things like "erh well thats great we have a unfinnished game and you have noticed but why dont you pay us some more money and we will maybee move it on little further for you. I knew the first time round with his quotes that a paid for expansion was coming . Now I ask you "when did you know it was coming?"
and instead of trying to derail this thread of conversation, it would be more helpful to post what areas of the game you'd like to see polished. As of version 5.5.2/6.5.2 we are approaching the end of the life cycle for this product, there won't be much more to update before we move on to another game engine. The income from this project will only support so many months of development work. = Lets just start with the thread subject e.g. the diplomatic relations and agreements are in need of some refining work from you guys
And just to add one last final point, I paid for the game and its expansion and have seen much improvement to the game. I just feel like I am being given the "the game is finnished folks, get over it" attitde from the devs recent post. I would have at least expected 2 more patches to come and then the modders to be able to go to work.
How many more patches do you devs think are coming ??
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22099
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Mutual defense not autodeclaration of war?
I never asked you to "be a fanboy", but as moderator of this forum I will expect you to follow the same rules as everyone else. If you're going to post something, please try and have it relate to the actual discussion in the thread. And for the record, every updated contained plenty of extra content in the forum of scenarios, units, techs and other such things. Features like the "provocation" system and allied victory would never have been added if not for post-release feedback. If you want to debate the condition of the game at release, start a new thread and I'll point it to George or David. I have no control in release schedules so I'm not going to get into such a discussion.
And BTW, I used the line of "maybe for a future title" when posting about SR2010 hundreds of time and it never got an expansion pack. And things like spies did actually get into a future title. Here's a strange idea, perhaps Legend was actually telling the truth...
As for the realtions and agreements system, I'm sure it could use some more balance tweaking but I'm quite happy with the current system. If you'd like me to post more of my thoughts on that subject, start a new thread.
As to the question of how many more updates, that is also out of my control. I know there is another one planned, this one with a longer turn around time that some of our other updates. Beyond that I've not been told any specifics. I do know there are other projects waiting to be moved into a full development cycle. Personally I could see us stopping at that or doing another. By the next update we will have covered much of what we wanted to achieve with this project and there's only so much more content we'll be looking to add. But depending what we do with the engine in the future, there may be benefits to further development. I suppose it will all depend on what 6.6.1 looks like. At a certain point we will need to move on to other projects if we want to stay in business. And that is obviously a key reason we're doing this, we all have families to take care of.
While the internal workings of the studio are none of your business, I can tell you that at release we had no idea there would be an expansion pack.gouldjg wrote:Now I ask you "when did you know it was coming?"
And BTW, I used the line of "maybe for a future title" when posting about SR2010 hundreds of time and it never got an expansion pack. And things like spies did actually get into a future title. Here's a strange idea, perhaps Legend was actually telling the truth...
Even better, lets discuss the actual thread subject listed in the thread title and the only topic in the posts immediatly preceding yours: what is Mutual Defense and how does it work? Your post did nothing to help people looking for an answer to the question.gouldjg wrote:Lets just start with the thread subject e.g. the diplomatic relations and agreements are in need of some refining work from you guys
As for the realtions and agreements system, I'm sure it could use some more balance tweaking but I'm quite happy with the current system. If you'd like me to post more of my thoughts on that subject, start a new thread.
We do appreciate the support of your purchase, thank you. And I'm going to try and detatch myself from this thread, I know that I've got my back up right now because I interpreted your comments as accusing a friend and colleague of mine, and in some sense the studio, of being "just after more money". There may be other studios out there who are as open to their community as we are to ours but I'll bet there's not many.gouldjg wrote:And just to add one last final point...
As to the question of how many more updates, that is also out of my control. I know there is another one planned, this one with a longer turn around time that some of our other updates. Beyond that I've not been told any specifics. I do know there are other projects waiting to be moved into a full development cycle. Personally I could see us stopping at that or doing another. By the next update we will have covered much of what we wanted to achieve with this project and there's only so much more content we'll be looking to add. But depending what we do with the engine in the future, there may be benefits to further development. I suppose it will all depend on what 6.6.1 looks like. At a certain point we will need to move on to other projects if we want to stay in business. And that is obviously a key reason we're doing this, we all have families to take care of.